Question For Fox News: How Much Rape Is Too Much Rape?

Contemporary media has many flaws that weigh upon its credibility. It has earned the disrespect of critics from across the political spectrum, and more importantly, from consumers of their news products. But every now and then there is an occurrence that is so inconceivably disgusting that it defies explanation. Such an occurrence took place today – where else – on Fox News.

In a discussion of the role of women in the military, Fox News contributor Liz Trotta expressed an opinion that could only be held by a seriously disturbed individual. On that measure, Trotta qualifies. The issue involved new rules from the Pentagon that would permit women to serve closer to the front lines. Trotta’s take on this centered on the problems faced by servicewomen who are sexually assaulted by fellow soldiers. She begins by insulting female soldiers as whiners who should shut up accept as a fact that if they work closely with men they should expect to be assaulted:

“We have women once more, the feminist, wanting to be warriors and victims at the same time. […] But while all of this is going on, just a few weeks ago, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta commented on a new Pentagon report on sexual abuse in the military. I think they have actually discovered there is a difference between men and women. And the sexual abuse report says that there has been, since 2006, a 64% increase in violent sexual assaults. Now, what did they expect? These people are in close contact.”

You see, it’s not the fault of the rapists. It’s just serendipity, nature playing out its course. From there Trotta moves on to lament the cost of enforcing military laws that prevent such assaults or providing support for the victims:

“And the feminists have also directed them, really, to spend a lot of money. They have sexual counselors all over the place, victims’ advocates, sexual response coordinators.”

I wonder if Trotta would also favor eliminating rules that prohibit any other sort of violent behavior. Perhaps she would oppose counseling for soldiers, male and female, suffering from post-traumatic stress. Those would be bad enough, but they don’t come close to what she said next:

“So, you have this whole bureaucracy upon bureaucracy being built up with all kinds of levels of people to support women in the military who are now being raped too much.”

Raped too much? I would really like to know precisely how much rape is acceptable before it crosses Trotta’s line. Is there any context in which she might have meant that that isn’t unfathomably repulsive?

This is not the first time Trotta has articulated out loud, and on the air, an inexcusably revolting opinion. Last month, in a commentary following the State of the Union address, she demeaned our most elite soldiers by wondering, “How many times is [Obama] going to use Seal Team 6 to get out of trouble? […] They are becoming political operatives.” And during the last presidential election Trotta joked about assassinating Obama.

It is inconceivable that anyone with this sustained record of nauseating commentary can continue to hold down a job as a news analyst. Any network that practiced even the most rudimentary level of ethics would throw her loathsome keister out the door. Fortunately for her, she doesn’t work for a network with ethics. She works for Fox News.

At some point, one does have to wonder where fox will draw the line. I would hope that there are some viewers who find this over the line but it’s sad to think that there are those who agree with her or at minimum, don’t see what the big deal is. Come on, they’re just women, right? They shouldn’t be there and probably deserve it anyway, right?